Cindy Chastain took some great photos from last night’s NYC edition of the UX Book Club.

The book we were discussing was Subject to Change, and it was really great to have one of the co-authors, Brandon Schauer available via skype to take questions and talk about the book.

Looking forward to the next book club event!

About a year ago, we had a deluge of rain that flooded the New York City subway system and basically shut several lines down completely for a day or more. The already crumbling NYC Transit’s infrastructure was simply unable to handle this amount of sudden rainfall. Soon after, the authority promised to make significant improvements, to be able to better handle an event like this in the future. One of these improvements was to better inform travelers of any possible issues with the subway service, so that they could plan accordingly. A week or so ago, with great fanfare, the MTA announced a new alert system that people could subscribe to, which would provide up-to-the-minute alerts about issues with the subway service.

So far so good.

I signed up for the new alert system and quickly discovered that the solution, aside from being fairly archaic in terms of how people subscribe and make their selections, simply is not the right fit for the problem. The reason for this is the somewhat tragic reality of New York’s subway system: it is effectively in a continual state of emergency. In other words, there are *always* a number of ongoing problems, such as a signal problem, a sick passenger, and on and on. Here is a sampling of alerts I received recently:

Smoke condition at 42nd St, Euclid C trains running exp from 59th St to Canal St and WTC E trains running exp from 42nd St to Canal St.

Police investigation at 86th St; Crown Heights 4 and Brooklyn Bridge 6 trains running express from 125th St to 42nd St.

Sick customer at Roosevelt Avenue, Jamaica bound E and 179th St bound F running local Roosevelt to Continental.

Now, imagine getting alerts like this in your inbox on a continual basis. Even if it may just be once a day (though these alerts are popping into my inbox throughout the day), you will eventually start to just ignore them or get sick of them and unsubscribe from the alerts. The problem here is that I am receiving a continual stream of information that most of the time is irrelevant to me, and would only be relevant to me at the particular point in time when I plan to ride the subway. For that reason, I think a pull rather than the current push model would make more sense. In other words, whenever I plan to ride the subway, I’d have a bookmarked link or whatever that would take me a to a page summarizing what was happening at that moment. Or, if I wanted to get even fancier, I’d have something like an iPhone app (or a Crackberry app, though I don’t know if they have GPS), which would automatically customize the info displayed based on my current location.

I am hoping that the initial version of the system is only just that, an initial version, and that there are plans to provide information in a way that is more timely and relevant.

Though Gail Collins does give her a run for her money, Maureen Dowd is definitely my favorite columnist. One thing she seems to manage to do in virtually every column is to include a word that I’ve never seen or heard before. In today’s column, that word is sesquipedalian.

I think I’m going to do a post every time she includes a new word from Maureen’s apparently infinite vocabulary.

Olga just sent me a link to her new project UX Social, in which she’s interviewing some guy on how IA could/should be applied to government policies and the like. Oh wait, that’s me!

(watch the 2nd part at Olga’s site)

In this interview, Olga gave me an opportunity to vent a little bit about the bane of my existence, and probably that of a few million other fellow New Yorkers, the MTA. Officially, the acronym stands for the Metro Transit Authority, though I think a more accurate meaning of is Mysterious Train Activity.

Anyhoo, one of the many many many stupid things that our beloved MTA did was to install ‘Emergency Exits’ at all of the several hundred subway stations. Problem is, these exits used to be normal exits, except they were bigger and wider than subway turnstyle exits, so that people with bikes and baby carriages could use them. The thing was, though, you had to press a tiny button next to the door and then wait for a subway attendant to buzz you through. And if there was no nearby attendant booth, well then there was no large exit door, so you’d have to trek to the opposite end of the station to be able to exit with your bike or whatever.

To address this problem, the MTA came up with a brilliant, brilliant!, solution. Y’know those doors with the big horizontal bar on the insider of the door that you push to exit? Well, they replaced all the old doors and installed additional doors at unattended areas with that *huuuge* button just begging to be pushed, which allows people to exit even if there is no attendant around. Oh, one small detail, there is a very noisy alarm that goes off when you push that huge irresistible button. But what do you care, you’re long gone up the stair and out of the subway, while the people on the platform have to contend with a sharp whining sound that seems like it’s never going to stop. Well, there’s more to the story, but check out Olga’s page for the rest of it.

Thanks Olga!

Oh, and she’s got lots of other great interviews with people a lot smarter than me at UX Social.

With great fanfare, New York City Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff (who will almost certainly never use this toilet himself) today announced the installation of new public toilets throughout the city (toilets he will almost certainly not be using himself.)  The idea of public restrooms in the city is of course highly welcomed, though it’s a bit embarrassing that this is being announced in 2008 and not, say, 1908.  But no matter, when reading the description of the new toilets, there are just so many IMO terrible design choices that were made that I have to wonder if any kind of prototyping/usability testing was completed.  I just can’t imagine these toilets being a success and these are some reasons why:

1 – They look like prison toilets

There is a very strong association between a stainless steel toilet attached to the wall with no seat and what you might find in a prison cell. In fact, when I first saw a picture of the toilet, I thought that it was a picture of exactly that. The idea of a prison toilet, of course, has strongly negative connotations, somehow making the statement that “citizens of New York are so uncivilized and prone to destruction of property that we have to take the same approach to designing a toilet for them as we would for prison inmates.” Sad indeed.

2 – I would never sit on a public steel toilet without a seat (even if it supposedly had been cleaned)

The reason for this is not only about logic, but also that I would just find it weird. And wouldn’t the toilet also get very hot in the summertime and very cold in the wintertime? Why couldn’t they at least have a plastic top on the toilet that can’t be lifted?

3 – The door to the toilet remains open for 20 to 30 seconds after entering

Like the NYT article says, this will

possibly be the longest and most awkward 20 to 30 seconds of a person’s day. The door slips open like an elevator, but then it stays open, to accommodate those who need extra time getting in. Meanwhile, men and women in suits walk past. It is very difficult to look inconspicuous in a bathroom on a sidewalk in New York with the door open. There is just nothing to do but stand there. And the delay will not please those who are in distress.

So here I am, really needing to go. With most every other toilet I’ve ever encountered, I can close the door behind me as soon as I enter. But here I am supposed to just stand there looking stupid with people walking by? The fact that certain disabled individuals may need more time is all good and well, but they should have the option of preventing the door from closing immediately rather than keep the door open for an extended period for everyone.  This is a case of broad-sword design, in which all users of a product are made to suffer to accommodate an edge case.

4 – The door to the toilet opens automatically after 15 minutes

Interestingly, this second ‘feature’ is in complete contradiction to the door being kept open on entry. What if I am a disabled person who needs more time? I would be publicly humiliated. And, frankly, even if I technically would be able to finish my business in that amount of time, I just don’t like the idea of this time limit hanging over me. And this isn’t just about disabled people. What about older people who need more time? Or parents with their kids? Very very bad, IMO.

5 – The toilets are only open from 8am to 8pm

If these toilets supposedly are completely automated, why in the world can they not be available 24/7? After all, the time when I think a lot of people would want to use something like this is when everything else is closed, i.e. not between 8am and 8pm.

6 – The toilet will use 14 gallons of water per use

This is according the NYT City Room Blog. Keeping in mind that the EPA’s recommendation of water use for a single flush is around 1.5 gallons, this is absolutely egregious. To be clear, the 14 gallons are used to hose down the toilet between each person who has used it. This kind of water waste is IMO simply environmentally unethical, and reason enough for me to avoid it.

I grew up in Stockholm, and basically got around pretty much everywhere either by riding my bike or by public transportation. Then, when I moved to Ann Arbor, MI, to go to school, it was pretty much the same story. Ride my bike to class, to work, everywhere. And then I moved to NYC, and have since barely “set butt” on a bike. Why? After all, lots and lots of people in New York City ride bikes. Sure, and more power to them, but when I tried heading out with my bike, I discovered something I hadn’t even thought of until moving to NYC – how dependent urban bikers are on a city’s infrastructure to be able to actually get around on their bikes. I’m not talking about bike lanes, which are important as well. I’m talking about having somewhere to put your bike when you arrive at your destination. Back in Ann Arbor and in Stockholm, bike racks are everywhere. Not so in NYC, for the obvious reason that bike theft is a huge problem her. And the office I work in (like many other NYC offices) is pretty cramped so I can’t take my bike upstairs either. In other words, I end up not riding my bike very much because I should want to leave my bike somewhere, I won’t have anywhere to park it. Unless of course, I want to chance it and leave my bike out on the street, chained to some scaffolding or whatever else I can find.

But today, I read about some truly great news for bicyclists in New York. Of all the things proposed in this article, I think the most important is a new zoning law that would require buildings to provide a space in the building where people can safely park their bikes. I doubt I’m alone in wanting to ride my bike to work but not having anywhere to put it. Let’s just hope that the ideas floated by city officials to improve bicycling infrastructure in the city actually become reality…